I
IDGAF
Alright, ya'll.
So one of the symptoms of PTSD for some sufferers (though not all, I know) is explosive anger and rage, often times misplaced on those closest to them. Case study after case study has unveiled alarming statistics about how combat vets with PTSD in particular are reported to be disproportionately more aggressive towards their spouse or partner, whether verbally or emotionally, and in some instances, even physically. There is also an 80% divorce rate among combat vets. All in all, NOT great odds.
That said, I'm confused. On the one hand, supporters learn from the VA and forums like these about how we should be understanding of this as a symptom and learn how to best support (but careful not to enable!) sufferers. Yet on the other, we're told NOT to accept any behavior we wouldn't accept from a person without PTSD. I find these two approaches to be diametrically opposed. Even a single instance of abuse of any kind is still exactly that: abuse. You've already tolerated mistreatment. And even if you do set a boundary afterwards, you've still set the precedent that on some level you will tolerate it, even just by staying. It's a slippery slope, one that insidiously erodes the very foundation that relationships are supposed to built on: MUTUAL love, respect, and trust.
Yet as the supporter, the impetus falls squarely on us to put even our most basic relationship needs aside to tend to the sufferer, all the while dying a slow death inside. As such, my conclusion is this: A relationship can only be as healthy as the unhealthiest partner. If someone can't even bring basic respect to the table on a consistent basis, then maybe just maybe, they shouldn't be in a relationship rather than drag another unsuspecting person through the same misery. Cause really, it ain't fair, at all.
Signed,
A burnt out supporter
So one of the symptoms of PTSD for some sufferers (though not all, I know) is explosive anger and rage, often times misplaced on those closest to them. Case study after case study has unveiled alarming statistics about how combat vets with PTSD in particular are reported to be disproportionately more aggressive towards their spouse or partner, whether verbally or emotionally, and in some instances, even physically. There is also an 80% divorce rate among combat vets. All in all, NOT great odds.
That said, I'm confused. On the one hand, supporters learn from the VA and forums like these about how we should be understanding of this as a symptom and learn how to best support (but careful not to enable!) sufferers. Yet on the other, we're told NOT to accept any behavior we wouldn't accept from a person without PTSD. I find these two approaches to be diametrically opposed. Even a single instance of abuse of any kind is still exactly that: abuse. You've already tolerated mistreatment. And even if you do set a boundary afterwards, you've still set the precedent that on some level you will tolerate it, even just by staying. It's a slippery slope, one that insidiously erodes the very foundation that relationships are supposed to built on: MUTUAL love, respect, and trust.
Yet as the supporter, the impetus falls squarely on us to put even our most basic relationship needs aside to tend to the sufferer, all the while dying a slow death inside. As such, my conclusion is this: A relationship can only be as healthy as the unhealthiest partner. If someone can't even bring basic respect to the table on a consistent basis, then maybe just maybe, they shouldn't be in a relationship rather than drag another unsuspecting person through the same misery. Cause really, it ain't fair, at all.
Signed,
A burnt out supporter